Shared vision for 70 Mulberry Street - REPORT - Report for the NYC Department of Citywide Administrative Services (DCAS) - NYC.gov
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
i 3X3 DESIGN US LLC REPORT Shared vision for 70 Mulberry Street Report for the NYC Department of Citywide Administrative Services (DCAS) Submitted by 3x3 Design 196 State St., Floor 3 Brooklyn, NY 11201 December 2020
ii Abbreviations 5G Fifth Generation Mobile Network ADA Americans with Disabilities Act Advisory Committee 70 Mulberry Street Advisory Committee C.B.J. Snyder Charles B.J. Snyder COVID-19 Coronavirus Disease 2019 CP Chinese-American Planning Council CMP Chinatown Manpower Project DCAS New York City Department of Citywide Administrative Services DDC Department of Design and Construction DOB New York City Department of Buildings FAR Floor Area Ratio Gym Gymnasium JACCC Japanese-American Cultural and Community Center M Million MoCA Museum of Chinese in America NYC New York City OACC Oakland Asian Cultural Center PhD Doctor of Philosophy PS 23 Public School no. 23 QR Quick Response UEAA United East Athletic Association ULURP Uniform Land Use Review Procedure
iii 3X3 DESIGN US LLC
Table of
Contents
01 02 3A
Background Community Findings: General
Visioning Process
Design
A community anchor Objectives Essence of time
Current 70 Mulberry Street Lines of inquiry Multifaceted opportunity for the
tenants future of Chinatown
Methods
Collective cultural Potential transfer of ownership
heritage Limitations
Possibility of reduced budget
Tragedy turned to allocation
opportunity
Loss of unique character
The City’s commitment
Negative impact of a high-rise
Project timeline on the neighborhood
3B 3C 3D 04
Findings: The Role Findings: Building Findings: Service Recommendations
of 70 Mulberry Design and Offerings and
Street Considerations Programming
Community anchor Architectural legacy and Community needs Guiding principles and role
design dimensions
Cultural Heritage Existing cultural and Program and service offerings
Preservation versus full multipurpose spaces
Learning demolition Building design and
New programs and offerings considerations
Adaptive reuse versus new
space planning Community space management
Building height and floor area
Current versus extended
programming
Additional community
concerns
01 3X3 DESIGN US LLC
01 Introduction
70 Mulberry Street is a historic A community anchor to hereafter as 70 Mulberry Street tenants)
landmark that holds memories of that, through their program and service
generations and a history that is 70 Mulberry Street was designed by offerings, have continued the building’s
deeply woven into the community it influential architect Charles B. J. (C.B.J.) legacy as an anchor of activity and source
Snyder to operate as a 31-classroom of pride of the community.
serves. Designed and operated as
elementary school with capacity for nearly
Public School (P.S.) 23 in the late 1,700 students.3 Designated as Public Current 70 Mulberry Street tenants
1800s, generations of community School no. 23 (or PS 23), and later The
residents were taught at 70 Mulberry Columbus School by the New York City – Chen Dance Center: “Established
Street in its early days. In its more Board of Education, the newly constructed in 1979, Chen Dance Center
recent history, the five-story red brick school was meant to serve as a model for has been dedicated to serving
building was home to non-profit future public schools creating students with the Asian-American community
community groups, and as such, a safe and healthy learning environment. and the New York City dance
Snyder saw school buildings as “civic community. This commitment is
served as an anchor to its community
monuments for a better society,” and in demonstrated through arts education
within and beyond Chinatown. his designs he was particularly focused at the School, opportunities and
In January 2020, 70 Mulberry Street considerations related to fire safety, production services at the Theater,
was severely damaged by a five-alarm ventilation, lighting, and classroom size.4 and a modern dance Company
fire that destroyed the top three Among Snyder’s innovations in PS 23 was known for moving presentations
floors and displaced its five tenants.1 the basement auditorium, the provision of Asian-American experiences.
of which marks a critical step in the The Center is also dedicated
In July 2020, the City of New York
movement to provide community centers to presenting a robust annual
announced $80 million in funding and neighborhood meeting halls within New educational programming to schools
to rebuild 70 Mulberry Street. As York City public school buildings.5 in the metropolitan area.”6
a part of its commitment, the City – Museum of Chinese in America
also launched a 90-day community In the mid-1970s, PS 23 was (MOCA): “Founded in 1980, the
visioning process to develop a shared decommissioned as a school and the Museum of Chinese in America
vision for 70 Mulberry Street.2 building was subsequently converted to (MOCA) is dedicated to preserving
serve as a community center for Chinatown. and presenting the history, heritage,
In the more than 40 years since, 70 culture and diverse experiences of
Mulberry Street has been the home to five people of Chinese descent in the
community-based organizations (referred United States. The greatly expanded
02
70 Mulberry Street during and after the fire (from left to right)
Source: Gardiner Anderson, New York Daily News, and Jeenah Moon, New York Times
MOCA at 215 Centre Street is a originally the CPC was a grassroots National Register of Historic Places “due
national home for the precious community-based organization in to its national significance stemming from
narratives of diverse Chinese response to the tremendous influx of its association with immigration from
American communities, and strives Chinese immigrants after the change 1800–1965.” It is located in a 38-block
to be a model among interactive in immigration laws, and in the midst area of lower Manhattan roughly bounded
museums.”7 of the Great Society movement. by Baxter Street, Center Street, Cleveland
– United East (UEAA): Established by a With some 50+ programs, today Place, and Lafayette Street to the west,
handful of sports enthusiasts in 1976, CPC services over 8,000 people Jersey Street and East Hudson to the
the United East Athletics Association’s daily through the provision of social north; Elizabeth Street to the east and
“initial goal was to offer recent services reaching from child care Worth Street to the south.11
immigrant youths and youths from the services, youth services, community
Chinatown area constructive sports services, workforce development, A majority of mid-nineteenth century
programs whereby they can develop and senior services.9 buildings remain intact in the district,
physically and mentally as well as – Chinatown Manpower Project contributing to the neighborhood’s historic
help them integrate into mainstream (CMP): Established in 1972, context, feeling, and readily identifiable
America. As the organization grew, “Chinatown Manpower Project, sense of place. Particularly, “the range of
UEAA was recognized as a solid Inc. (CMP) provides vocational vernacular and nationally-popular styles
component of the Chinese community training, employment services, has produced a multi-textured and visually
in addressing the developmental educational programs and economic appealing streetscape composed of
needs of our young people. With development opportunities to buildings that are typically brick, four bays
the support of the community, UEAA disadvantaged immigrants and wide and three to seven stories in height.
expanded from offering strictly refugees throughout New York City. There are no setbacks or front yards;
sports-oriented programs to include With assistance from both private therefore articulation in the streetscape
community services and activities, and public funding sources, CMP comes from the variety of styles of
such as leadership development, helps individuals take full advantage buildings and often elaborate wrought
summer youth recreational and of all opportunities to succeed in or cast iron fire escapes mandated after
educational programs, and host their new environment.”10 1867.”12 As such, beyond the services and
cultural events around the Chinese programs offered, the 70 Mulberry Street
traditions and arts.”8 Collective cultural heritage building holds architectural and cultural
– Chinese-American Planning Council significance to the local Manhattan
(CPC): Founded in 1965, the In 2010, Little Italy and Chinatown were Chinatown community and New York City.
Chinese-American Planning Council, listed in a single historic district on the
03 3X3 DESIGN US LLC
Figure 01: Project Timeline
July 2020 September 2020 December 2020
Announcement of Initiation of community Recommendations
funding visioning process report
Tragedy turned to opportunity The City’s commitment Project timeline
On January 23, 2020 a devastating fire As a part of its commitment, the City Following the July 2020 announcement
significantly damaged 70 Mulberry Street, also assured the return of all five tenant of funding and process goals, the
which led the New York City Department organizations to the building upon community visioning process was jointly
of Buildings (DOB) “to issue a vacate completion of the rebuilding process. The initiated in September 2020. An initial
order that required the New York City City also committed to a three-month-long phase of preliminary research and
Department of Citywide Administrative community visioning process to help planning was followed by a series of
Services (DCAS) to demolish a portion of ensure that public input about the future community meetings and workshops, a
the building.”13 The five community-based of the site would be gathered to inform survey, and an ongoing document review
tenant organizations have since relocated the rebuilding process. To that end, DCAS conducted over a period of 90 days.
and begun to offer some of their services formed an advisory committee consisting The drafting of this report marks the
in a reduced capacity at interim locations. of building tenants and representatives conclusion of the process, culminating in
However, this disruption and alteration appointed by elected and community a set of findings and recommendations
of services has potential impacts both officials including Congresswoman for the future of 70 Mulberry Street
on the recipients of services and on the Nydia Velázquez, Manhattan Borough including its programming, design, and
organizations themselves, as nonprofit President Gale Brewer, State Senator future role within the community.
fundraising efforts often rely on consistent Brian Kavanagh, State Assemblywoman
track records for service provision. On July Yuh-Line Niou, Councilmember Margaret
2, 2020 the City of New York announced Chin, and Manhattan Community Board
a commitment of $80 million in funding 3. 3x3 was selected as an independent
to redevelop 70 Mulberry Street with a consultant to co-lead and facilitate
goal of ensuring that it will continue to the community visioning process with
serve as a community resource for future the intent of ensuring inclusion and
generations, breaking with a narrative of transparency.
historic disinvestment in the area.
04
02 Community Visioning
Process Design
3x3 employed a mixed-methods Objectives the following lines of inquiry through the
approach to the community methodology described below. Informed
visioning process. The scope of the In consultation with the Advisory Committee by a complementary document review,
engagement initially focused on and DCAS, 3x3 established the following and further refined based on stakeholder
set of objectives for an inclusive community feedback provided through the visioning
community meetings with different
visioning process for 70 Mulberry Street: process, the methodology and lines
stakeholders including residents, of inquiry guided the design of the
small business owners, and property – Identify and evaluate existing community meetings and the analytical
owners that live or work in the vicinity and future community needs and process.
of 70 Mulberry Street, in addition to aspirations from the perspective of
community and industry stakeholder community members. Aspirational role of 70 Mulberry Street in
groups and service recipients of the – Identify and assess existing concerns its community
five non-profit tenants. about the 70 Mulberry Street Explore the roles that 70 Mulberry
rebuilding process. Street fulfilled in the past, learn
To triangulate and validate qualitative – Surface, consider, and evaluate about community visions and values,
findings from the community the pros and cons of proposed and identify where viewpoints are in
meetings, the scope was adjusted strategies. opposition and where they align:
to include a survey and a review of – Steward and foster trust and dialogue – What roles has 70 Mulberry Street
among diverse stakeholder groups. fulfilled in the past from different
additional documents. One hundred
– Combine different ideas into one stakeholder perspectives?
thirty community members registered feasible vision for the future of the – What values are surfacing through
for the community listening meetings, site. these roles?
172 registered for the virtual town – Increase process transparency, and – What are stakeholder visions for the
hall, 128 registered for the workshop, ensure efficiency adhering to the future of 70 Mulberry Street? What
and 551 community members 90-day timeline. roles do community stakeholders see
responded to the survey. the building and its tenants playing in
the future?
. Line of Inquiry – What community values are
surfacing through desired,
To achieve the established objectives, aspirational roles for the rebuilt 70
the community visioning process pursued Mulberry Street?
05 3X3 DESIGN US LLC
Figure 02: Key thematic areas
Aspirational Programming
role of 70 and Service
Mulberry Street offerings
Building
design and
considerations
– Where do community stakeholders – What are the widely perceived those offered by the tenants of 70
hold opposing viewpoints, where do trade-offs of each dimension/ Mulberry Street?
they align? scenario?
– What are the areas of alignment Methods
Building design and considerations across stakeholder groups?
Explore the building design considerations – What other concerns does the Defining the methods—the approach and
for the rebuilding process, surface and community hold about the design of specific processes associated with data
understand concerns, desires and the building? collection and analysis—might be one of
aspirations, opportunities, and potential – What other concerns does the the most defining tasks of a community
trade-offs associated with different community hold about the rebuilding visioning process. Detailed below is
building scenarios: process broadly? an overview of the methods employed
– What building design aspects should for this visioning process, as well as
be considered for the rebuilding Service offerings and programming constraints and limitations such as those
process? Identify the most pressing priorities introduced in response to COVID-19
– What are community priorities in related to community needs and desires health and safety considerations. The
relation to different building design and how they might be addressed visioning process was conducted using a
dimensions, namely: through service offerings and programs at mixed-methods approach carried out via
– preservation versus new 70 Mulberry Street: four phases over a three-month period
development – What are the most pressing needs between September and December,
– adaptive reuse versus new space and desires across community 2020.
planning stakeholders?
– retaining current building height – How might these be addressed Phase 1 focused on establishing the
and floor area versus expanding through service and programs infrastructure of the process, including
building height and floor area offerings at 70 Mulberry Street? the formation of the working mode
– retaining current programming – What are existing offerings within with the Advisory Committee, a review
versus expanding current the community? How might these of existing documents and reports
programming be harnessed in the context of the concerning the past, present, and
– What are notable opportunities for rebuilding process? future of 70 Mulberry Street to inform
each of these dimensions/scenarios? – How might any new service offerings the objectives and strategies of the
– What are stakeholder concerns about and programs complement existing process, and format of the first round of
these dimensions/scenarios? services and programs, including community meetings.
06
Figure 03: Community Visioning Process Design
Community Meetings Community Meetings
Round 1 Round 2
Project Research Preliminary Building Survey Synthesis Report
Kick-off Analysis scenarios
Listening Listening
Sessions Sessions
DISCOVER DEFINE DESIGN REFINE
Phase 2 included the first round of foster discussion across stakeholders. the 130 people who registered for the
community meetings, continued review There were a total of 430 participant listening sessions, 48.5% belonged to
of additional documents submitted by registrations for the community meetings the community and industry stakeholder
process participants including, among (130 for the listening sessions, 172 for group, 27% belonged to the resident and
others, letters, reports, and proposals the town hall, and 128 for the workshop, service recipients stakeholder group,
for the future of the site. A mid-term respectively). The registrations do not 12% belonged to the small business
synthesis of the findings from the initial include Advisory Committee members owner group, and 12% belonged to the
community meetings informed the and other people who might have property owner group. Twenty-five people
development of a survey to complement received the meeting information through requested Cantonese facilitation.
the engagement process. participants who registered. A sampling
overview of each meeting is provided Town hall
Phase 3 included dissemination of the below. 3x3 conducted a virtual town hall with
survey and a second round of community no break out room for all stakeholders
meetings in addition to ongoing meetings Listening sessions on November 9, 2020. The session was
with the Advisory Committee. 3x3 conducted five virtual listening facilitated on Zoom using a slide deck
sessions with one to four breakout rooms and with a real-time virtual whiteboard
Phase 4 included a thematic analysis of per session for different stakeholder space (via the platform, Mural) to support
findings from previous phases, including groups from October 13 through 16, a free flow open mic forum and enable
a quantitative analysis of survey results, 2020 using Zoom, a digital video all stakeholders to express, listen, and
synthesis conducted by the 3x3 project conferencing platform. 3x3 facilitators discuss their concerns and needs.
team, and a synthesis session with the used Zoom breakout rooms to facilitate
Advisory Committee and DCAS to review small working groups through a set of One hundred seventy-two people
findings. visual, prioritization, and discussion registered and approximately 140
prompts focused on three themes: participated in the town hall, although
Methodology and sampling the role of 70 Mulberry Street, design a precise number of participants
considerations, and needs. cannot be captured due to the nature
3x3 applied a set of design-led methods of registration on the Zoom platform. Of
and digital convening formats to probe A total of 130 people registered for the total registrants, 51.2% belonged to
the lines of inquiry, elicit explicit as the listening sessions and more than the community and industry stakeholder
well as tacit knowledge, challenge 150 people participated in the session group, 10.5% belonged to the resident
assumptions, deepen understanding, and including the Advisory Committee. Of stakeholder group, 15.7% belonged to07 3X3 DESIGN US LLC
Figure 04: Number of community participants
150 140 100 551
Listening Meetings Town Hall Workshop Survey
service recipients stakeholder group, belonged to the participants who did not Survey
3.5% belonged to the small business register and representatives of Advisory 3x3 administered a digital and
owner group, 4.7% belonged to the Committee. Twelve people requested paper-based survey from October 23
property owner group, and the remaining Cantonese facilitation and five requested through November 15, 2020. The main
belonged to the participants who did not Mandarin facilitation. purpose of the survey was to triangulate
register and representatives of Advisory and cross-validate qualitative findings
Committee. Twelve people requested Document review from the community meetings and assess
Cantonese facilitation and six requested The chosen formats of the community priorities and concerns about the future
Mandarin facilitation. meetings and synthesis were informed by of 70 Mulberry Street. Survey questions
the history of 70 Mulberry Street, current were informed by a document review (see
Workshop data and trends, community needs and below) and findings drawn from the first
3x3 conducted a virtual interactive concerns, and aspirations for the future of round of community meetings.
workshop with five breakout rooms for all the site. To do so, 3x3 conducted an ongoing
stakeholders on November 10, 2020. The review of documents including letters, 3x3 administered and monitored the
session was facilitated on Zoom using a proposals, and reports regarding the history multilingual survey rollout in English,
slide deck. 3x3 facilitators used Zoom and future of the site submitted by different Simplified Chinese, and Traditional
breakout rooms to facilitate small working stakeholders through email and survey. Chinese through SurveyMonkey, an
groups through a set of prioritization, The facilitation team added the option to online survey platform. 3x3, DCAS, and
visuals, and discussion prompts. upload documents through survey to expand the Advisory Committee promoted the
outreach by opening up an additional digital survey link and Quick Response
One hundred twenty-eight people channel for members of the community to (QR) code on their social media
registered and approximately 100 people provide context to the process and express channels. The Advisory Committee, which
participated in the workshop. Among their needs, concerns, and ideas. included tenants and elected officials,
those who registered, 53.7% belonged to disseminated the survey through existing
the community and industry stakeholder A total of 21 documents were submitted connections into the community to
group, 7.4% belonged to the resident by different stakeholders, among which increase access and expand outreach.
stakeholder group, 13.9% belonged to seven were letters, five were proposals, DCAS collected the completed paper
service recipients stakeholder group, and the remaining were research surveys via a physical dropbox installed at
3.7% belonged to the small business documents and book chapters that spoke 70 Mulberry Street.
owner group, 3.7% belonged to the to the history and needs of Chinatown.
property owner group, and the remaining Of the 551 people who responded to the08
Figure 05: Community meetings participants, by stakeholder group
Advisory Committee
5.8%
Small Business Owner
6.0%
Property Owner
6.7%
Other
Community Groups 6.7%
49.3%
Service Recipients
14.9%
Residents and Service Recipients
10.6%
survey, 27.7% belonged to the community Cantonese Chinese, and Japanese. Data Analysis Methods
and industry stakeholder group,
35.6% belonged to service recipients With regard to household income, 42.1% A number of methods were used to
stakeholder group, 13.7% belonged to of the respondents reported their annual synthesize and structure findings
the resident stakeholder group, 10.1% household income as under $50,000, associated with the previously defined
belonged to the small business owner which is less than the median household data sources:
group, 3.4% belonged to the property income in New York City $60,372 (U.S.
owner group, and 0.4% belonged to Census Bureau 2019). Thirty-one percent Tagging
the Advisory Committee. Nine percent of participants reported income between Key phrases from qualitative research
of respondents did not identify their $50,000 and $100,000, and 19.4% of were tagged, or coded, to identify broad
stakeholder group. participants reported income between themes and patterns across the different
$100,000 and $200,000. modes and audiences. Attention was paid
With the exception of individuals under to context, consistency, contradiction
19 or over 80 years of age, there was The majority of the respondents reported of views, frequency, intensity, degree of
a relatively even distribution amongst engaging regularly with the services specificity across groups.
respondents. The majority of the survey offered at 70 Mulberry Street prior to the
respondents had at least some college fire in January. Of the 533 people who Statistical Analysis
education, with 64.9%of the 532 survey responded to a question regarding their The survey questionnaire was structured
participants who responded to the previous level of engagement, 36.2% to collect quantitative data related to
education question indicating they had reported visiting the building or engaging community preferences. The quantitative
some college education or a higher level with services at least once per week, data were analyzed to interrogate the
of educational attainment. 18.6% reported two to three times per validity of previously collected qualitative
month, 9% reported one time per month, data. This effort was undertaken via
The majority of the survey respondents 18.8% reported every few months, and descriptive statistics such as percentage
identified as Asian non-Hispanic. Of the 519 only 17.4% reported rarely or never scores and weighted averages.
participants who responded to the question visiting the building or engaging with the
about racial and ethnic identity, 83.2% services and programs offered at 70 Triangulation
identified as Asian non-Hispanic. More than Mulberry Street. Data from all available sources were
half of the Asian non-Hispanic respondents triangulated to validate findings,
reported their ethnicity as Chinese, followed conclusions, and recommendations.
by Chinese American, Asian American, Preliminary findings were validated and09 3X3 DESIGN US LLC
Figure 06: Survey participants, by demographics
Advisory Committee Property Owners 10 to 19 years
0.4% 3.4% 2.6%
30 to 39 years 80 years or older
Other 17.9% 3.5%
9.0%
20 to 29 years
Service Recipients 11.4%
35.6%
Small Business Owner
10.1%
60 to 69 years
17.5%
50 to 59 years
13.8%
Residents
13.7%
40 to 49 years 70 to 79 years
Community Groups 17.0% 16.2%
27.7%
Stakeholder group affiliation Age
Non-Binary
0.4% Vocational or Trade School Other
0.9% 1.3%
Prefer not to disclose P.h.D or higher
2.5% 2.3%
Prefer not to say
3.0%
Some High School
4.1%
No Degree
Bachelor’s Degree 9.0%
34.0%
Female Male
55.4% 41.7%
Some College
9.8%
High School
Master’s Degree 14.5%
21.1%
Gender Education
Over $400,000
1.4%
$200,000 - $400,000
5.8%
Once a month
9.0%
Once a week or more
36,2%
$100,000 - $200,000 Rarely/Never
Under $50,000 19.4% 17.4%
42.1%
2-3 times a month
$50,000 - $100,000 18.6%
31.3% Every few months
18.8%
Annual Household Income Engagement with 70 Mulberry Street
Native Hawaiian & Pacific Islander nonhispanic Some Other Race nonhispanic
0.2% 0.4%
American Indian & Alaska Native nonhispanic Black/African American
0.2% 0.4%
Hispanic Origin
1.0%
Two or More Races nonhispanic
1.7%
White nonhispanic
12.9%
Asian nonhispanic
83.2%
Race10
confirmed with the Advisory Committee Project scope stakeholders, including, among others,
through an online presentation and The original project design included in developers, construction managers, and
discussion at the end of each community the request for proposals and allocated others otherwise relevant to a rebuilding
meeting round to synthesize and resources limited the scope to a series process.
determine recommendations. of community meetings. 3x3 added a
survey and a pathway for the community
Limitations to upload documents to provide additional
data points to validate and triangulate
This visioning process encountered findings from the community meetings.
constraints and challenges that impacted The scope did not include a needs
process design, methodology, delivery, assessment of the neighborhood.
and overall project outcomes, which
required 3x3 to plan and adjust project Digital and language barriers
management strategies accordingly and Set in the community of Chinatown, this
on an ongoing basis. These, among others, project faced challenges concerning
included: language and digital access. While
facilitation was offered in multiple languages,
Project timeline and efforts were made to reach those with
With a set project duration of 90 days no or limited access to the internet, these
for completion from launch to the report factors should still be considered reviewing
delivery, the project schedule was the outcomes of the process.
predetermined, necessitating an expedited
outreach, engagement, and analysis Outreach barriers
process. A time period of at least 10 days In the context of the pandemic,
was allowed for outreach to ensure the community outreach methods were
fast execution would not limit outreach limited to flyering, digital communications
activities. methods, and virtually facilitated
community meetings. Additionally, a
Data collection challenges paper-based survey was disseminated
Conducted between September and with the intent to reach those with no or
December 2020 in the midst of the limited digital access.
COVID-19 pandemic, data collection
methods were required that minimized To support outreach in the community,
physical interaction in the interest of public the 70 Mulberry Advisory Panel was
health and safety. Community outreach established as part of this visioning
was limited to majority digital methods. process. Members of the Advisory
For example, under circumstances that Panel played a key role in the outreach
would have allowed for meetings to be and dissemination of process- related
conducted in-person, the community materials raising potential concerns that
engagement process might have been the process risks biasing panel members
approached through a hybrid online/ and affiliated groups’ needs over broader
in-person approach rather than being community needs. Several strategies
solely conducted via Zoom. Conducting aimed to address this risk through, such
all community outreach meetings online as. publicly available press statements,
limited participant access to a certain open access meeting formats, and
degree, particularly for those with expansion of outreach through
lower levels of digital literacy or access. organizations beyond the Advisory Panel.
To address this issue, 3x3 added a
paper-based survey to be disseminated Limited group of stakeholders
throughout Chinatown, with the intent of This process was designed to prioritize
reaching those with limited or no access to the input from community members
digital technologies. regarding the rebuilding process
and emphasized their inputs rather
than convening an extended group of11 3X3 DESIGN US LLC
3A Findings: General
This section introduces findings Essence of time Multifaceted opportunity for the future
derived from the community visioning of Chinatown
process. It comprises a range of Opportunities are time-sensitive. Across
concerns and sentiments shared stakeholder groups and meetings, The uniqueness of this opportunity
participants expressed a desire to move raises expectations about an exceptional
across different stakeholder groups
forward quickly with the process, and outcome resulting in a newly built facility
concerning the rebuilding process had strong concerns about possible risks that can serve and inspire many future
of 70 Mulberry Street. Furthermore, associated with losing momentum with the generations. The notion of the rebuilding
it speaks to underlying expectations project, including a potential (a) extended process being a once-in-a-lifetime
and hopes regarding process’ duration of the rebuilding process (coupled opportunity also manifested the expressed
governance moving forward that were with an inability to address pressing hope to take advantage of it and rebuild
expressed at the different community community needs via vital services while 70 Mulberry Street as a building with the
meetings, and further evaluated and the building is out of commission), (b) loss ability to adapt and serve the needs of
of the associated funds via reappropriation future generations of Chinatown. As such,
validated through the survey.
and changing political priorities and the rebuilding process of 70 Mulberry
administrative change, (c) cancellation of Street is perceived as a multi-faceted
the rebuilding process altogether, and (d) opportunity that:
loss of economic and other opportunities
while the process is ongoing. Forty-two (a) recognizes and honors Chinatown’s
percent of survey respondents indicated heritage,
that a lengthy rebuilding process was (b) acknowledges and manifests its
their top concern, indicating that reducing community’s contributions to Asian
rebuilding time was a top priority for many. American identity,
Among the five nonprofit organizations (c) ignites a reconciliation and healing
and their service recipients, there was process, and
an urgency to return to the building as (d) spurs local economic activity.
quickly as possible to restore the services
at 70 Mulberry Street in order to serve Potential transfer of ownership
community needs as soon as possible.
Participants across stakeholder groups
shared an interest for the building to
remain publicly owned and accessible.12
Figure 07: Rebuilding concerns
What are your biggest concerns about the rebuilding process of 70 Mulberry Street? Choose up to 3. (N = 551) Source: 70
Mulberry Street Community Visioning Survey
Many community members expressed community. The inability to see proof of frequently requested information and
concerns that privatization of building the budget allocation fueled community voiced concerns about future building
ownership would be coupled with a fears about whether the City will uphold management, which is perceived as a
loss of community services and a the previously established budget in determining factor in the nature and
misalignment between public interests the context of the pandemic crisis and quality of future services of the building.
and private management entities. administrative change following the 2021 “There is lack of information on issues
Thirty-four percent of survey respondents election. raised prior, we are feared that this will
selected ‘the building might be sold to continue…”
a private developer’ as one of their top “Whatever you are going to build it’s not “...The City’s unwillingness to allow
three concerns. going to work; another construction in my access and evaluations by qualified
neighborhood has been going on for three outside experts on the building deprives
“The building should be maintained as a years…” the community of the right to make
community building—the only nonprofit “Is $80 million guaranteed? Where can informed choices on the future of this
building serving the community.” we see it?” important site.”
“Even if the money is in as a line item, we
“The site should go back to being a While the City provided evidence for are in a pandemic…”
community center and provide arts and the budget allocation over the course “We do not know where that number [$80
community programs, not turn into a of the community visioning process, million] is coming from.”
massive building with homes, nor turn which partially addressed the concern,
into a private real estate development.” skepticism remained high, particularly in Loss of unique character
relation to a perceived lack of information
Possibility of reduced budget allocation concerning trade-offs related to different Another frequent concern among
building scenarios as well as whether participants relates to the degree to
Thirty-four percent of survey respondents results of this visioning process would which the rebuilding process could be
selected $80 million might not be ultimately be upheld or incorporated into responsible for stripping 70 Mulberry
added in the next budget, confirming the City’s decisions about the future of Street of its unique character and
the presence of a sense of skepticism the site.14 The skepticism highlights the symbolism within the community. This
and mistrust in the City’s commitment importance of continued engagement finding emerged in the first round of
to the project, which may stem from a and information transparency, as well as community meetings and was further
long-perceived lack of investment in, an avenue for community members to confirmed when 32.3% of survey
and public support of, the Chinatown follow the rebuilding process. Participants respondents expressed concern that 7013 3X3 DESIGN US LLC
“A 20 story building will be an absolutely insensitive
use of this cultural heart of chinatown. Tenants need to
re-establish their homes at 70 Mulberry as quickly as
possible. However, with that said, there does not need
to be a choice between expediency of rebuilding and
preservation of our community’s history. Both can happen
with a sensitive architectural design of this space. This
needs to be addressed and not pushed to the side.”
Mulberry Street was at risk of losing its well as reflect its distinctive and evolving
unique character. The community saw narrative. Twenty-seven percent (27%) of
the building’s uniqueness and pivotal survey respondents expressed concerns
role in the community as a function of about the potential negative impacts of a
many factors including the programs and 20-story building on the neighborhood.
services associated with the nonprofit
tenants, historical architecture, and “Maintain the skyplane. For the light onto
storied historical connection to the the street, if you are building any higher
neighborhood. that would impact the sunlight of others.”
“A place for immigrants coming to the “Please do not make a 20-Story building!
community and a place where they can That would hurt the heart of Chinatown,
build friendship, sense of community, my hometown.”.
interest and appreciation for arts and “Build up the max height as soon as
culture.” possible.”
“70 Mulberry Street is very important to
the heart of culture in Chinatown. It was “A 20 story building will be an absolutely
devastating when it burned. Please keep insensitive use of this cultural heart of
the spirit of that building alive and make chinatown. Tenants need to re-establish
it stronger.” their homes at 70 Mulberry as quickly as
possible. However, with that said, there
Negative impact of a high-rise on the does not need to be a choice between
neighborhood expediency of rebuilding and preservation
of our community’s history. Both can
More than just hoping the outcome of the happen with a sensitive architectural
rebuilding process would be compatible design of this space. This needs to be
with the neighborhood, participants addressed and not pushed to the side.”
expressed hopes that the rebuilt 70
Mulberry Street will fit the character of
the neighborhood, and simultaneously
represent a connection to the past as14
3C Findings: The Role of 70
Mulberry Street
This section focuses on perspectives Community Anchor to a community that supports them
related to the historical connection through their connection to the building.
between 70 Mulberry Street and Many participants shared a historical and Consequently, participants expressed the
the communities it has served. With cultural narrative that defines 70 Mulberry importance of the need to regain that
Street as a multifaceted site of gathering community in the wake of the loss spurred
this foundation, this section explores
and connection, whether for learning or to by the fire. Several themes related to this
community visions for the future find a community and sense of belonging. shared longing for community emerged:
through identification of sometimes It was also seen as a space to learn about
conflicting and aligned values and Asian American heritage and culture, and – New building, old spirit: Participants
associated viewpoints. there was a strong expressed desire for expressed that the new building will
the building to continue playing this role. have to balance the past and the
future, and that doing so will require
A majority of participants agreed with memorializing yet continuing the
the sentiment that 70 Mulberry Street spirit of the old public school and
should function as a community anchor, service center while expanding to
with 71.7% selecting community as the reach new community members
top value associated with the building. and meet new needs. For example,
Many perceived the building as playing one of the participants said, “as
an important role for community you enter the building, you kind of
members across different age groups, know what the building is and what
new immigrants, and multi-generation it symbolizes.” Another said, “we
Asian Americans. Respondents desired need a place to celebrate our cultural
the space to serve the dual functions of heritage, therefore build a cultural
providing a space for social interaction center for all Chinese citizens and all
across ethnicities and serving as a site of are welcome.”
resource aggregation for the broader Asian – Unite the old and the young:
American community. Participants also saw the building
as space where young people
Many service recipients and alumni of can learn about Asian American
the former school expressed experiencing culture and unite with the older
immersion in Asian American history population groups to heal trauma
and culture and a sense of belonging caused by xenophobia and racism.15 3X3 DESIGN US LLC
One participant expressed hope culture and heritage, providing a place “It’s important that there is a space
that 70 Mulberry Street could be to express Asian American identities in Chinatown that welcomes all
rebuilt as a “place to provide various and serving as a home for arts and generations, and allows the community
services for our next generation’s cultural programming. Many see the to express pride in its Asian American
and community’s development,” rebuilding of 70 Mulberry Street as an identity and humanity.”
while another said, “Chinatown as opportunity to reflect upon, express,
a community has quite a wide age and contribute to an emergent Asian “Keeping traditional Chinese traditions
spectrum. I think it’s important that American consciousness through a alive … engaging Chinese Americans of
if the space is used as a community range of programming and connection of all ages to participate in festivities”
gathering place, it’s used to unite the artists at different scales, from local to “My grandfather arrived in Chinatown
elderly in the area with young folks global. With many participants advocating in 1903. And for nearly 120 years since
and be inclusive to both.” for the preservation of 70 Mulberry’s then, my family and I have been a part
– Learn and support: Community cultural heritage as represented in a of this community. Throughout all this
members saw bringing people diverse range of identities—including, time, 70 Mulberry Street has been
together to make new connections among others, Chinese American, a cornerstone in the neighborhood,
and support and learn from each Asian American, Immigrant, and New whether as a beloved public school, or
other as a critical part of the 70 Yorker— an opportunity emerges for the community cultural hub, or an entry
Mulberry Street community. One building to play a role in bridging across point for generations of immigrants and
participant referred to the building cultures within the larger Asian American I, myself, have worked in Chinatown
as “a space where generations community and serving as a center of for over 40 years and participated in
meet and interact with each other,” cultural education for young people. numerous programs there. We are the
and another participant stated current guardians of a neighborhood
that rebuilding 70 Mulberry is “an “I think it is vital that the arts, legacy.”
opportunity to serve more people particularly the performing arts, [the
more appropriately,” referring to the organizations could] still have a home Immigrant neighborhood : For many, 70
large number of groups that have at 70 Mulberry. Organizations like Chen Mulberry Street is strongly related to the
expressed interest in sharing the Dance Center provide dance training immigrant experience in New York City.
space at 70 Mulberry Street. and performance opportunities to Built in 1971, multiple generations of
thousands of Chinatown residents and immigrants in Chinatown have gathered
“[My mother] is a member of the NYC public school students and draw at the site to receive education, seek
Chinatown Senior Center, which has in people not just from the Chinatown a sense of belonging, or participate
been there for about 40 years and community but all over NYC.” in community activities. Former PS
used to take up the entire ground floor. 23’s rich immigrant history was made
She wants to remind everybody that it “Keeping traditional Chinese traditions famous by an article in the New-York
was a very important gathering place alive, engaging Chinese Americans of Tribune in 1905 that noted the building
for about 300 seniors. Each and every all ages to participate in festivities.” as the “school of 29 nationalities.” PS
day, five days a week, it was a gathering 23 had an extremely diverse student
place for lunch. On top of that, the Chinese and Asian American identity: body, including students with ethnic and
other uses were musical performances. Many participants expressed sentiments cultural identities from modern-day Italy,
There were dance classes, Tai Chi of the building as a shared resource—-a Germany, Poland, Ireland, Russia, Turkey,
classes, drawing classes, computer cultural common—-that holds significance England, Scotland, Greece, Syria, Austria,
classes and English classes. So there to Chinatown’s Chinese and Asian Egypt, Switzerland, and Lithuania, among
were a lot of uses in there that we American community including alumni of others.15 Participants noted its rich
would like to see restored.” PS 23, service recipients of the nonprofit immigrant history:
tenants, and residents and cultural
Cultural heritage and identity organizations of Chinatown. Alumni of “It remains as a physical reminder of
PS 23 who participated in the meetings the collective history and generations
Heritage was selected by 39.6% of discussed their deep cultural and of residents who attended that school,
survey respondents, ranking second emotional attachment to the building, and have fond memories of that
amongst values associated with 70 some still walking by the building almost school and received an education that
Mulberry Street. The community widely every day. impacted the rest of their lives.”
understands the building as central to “Now we are at the point where we
Chinatown and New York City’s Asian more or less the Asians are Chinese16 Figure 08: Values What are your biggest concerns about the rebuilding process of 70 Mulberry St.? Choose up to 3.(N = 551) Source: 70 Mulberry Street Community Visioning Survey Figure 09: Cultural identity To what extent do you agree with the following statements, on a scale of strongly disagree = -2 to strongly agree = 2. Source: 70 Mulberry Street Community Visioning Survey Figure 10: Cultural identity and Chinatown To what extent do you agree with the following statements, on a scale of strongly disagree = -2 to strongly agree = 2. Source: 70 Mulberry Street Community Visioning Survey
17 3X3 DESIGN US LLC
“When my family escaped the violence out west in the
nineteenth century, they found refuge in New York’s
Chinatown. And the first generation of Americans and
my family were educated at 70 Mulberry. These were my
grandparents, my parents, my aunts, my uncles. They
learned English; they learned American values; they
learned civic engagement and the importance of voting.
This building is historic, and it means a lot to my family. But
it’s also part of the cultural fabric of Chinatown. And I would
hate to see it become torn down like the old Penn Station.”
and pretty much dominate Chinatown, participants spoke about the deep impact
but let’s not forget about those people of the learning experience associated
who came before because 70 Mulberry with the building had on their lives.
also means something to them as well. Suggestions from participants ranged
So it’s not just the Chinese, but as for from opening a learning center to a
our neighbors.” center for vocational training and cultural
archives.
“When my family escaped the violence
out west in the nineteenth century, they “It is a place for immigrants coming
found refuge in New York’s Chinatown. to the community and a place where
And the first generation of Americans they can build friendship, sense of
and my family were educated at 70 community, interest and appreciation
Mulberry. These were my grandparents, for arts and culture.”
my parents, my aunts, my uncles. They
learned English; they learned American “I highly support vocational training for
values; they learned civic engagement this new building. Especially with the
and the importance of voting. This impacts of COVID, Chinatown and the
building is historic, and it means a Chinese community continues to suffer
lot to my family. But it’s also part of economically…”
the cultural fabric of Chinatown. And I
would hate to see it become torn down
like the old Penn Station.”
Learning
Thirty-six percent selected Learning as
a value associated with 70 Mulberry
Street underpinning the hope expressed
by many during the community meetings
that the educational legacy of the building
will be continued once the rebuilding
process has been completed. Many18
3C Findings: Building Design
and Considerations
This section describes aspects of I. Architectural legacy and design and Renaissance Revival brick walls,
the building design under review dimensions corner tower design, and ornamented
during the visioning process, the and rusticated brownstone ashlar
community preferences for each of As mentioned in the introduction, 70 base; and,
Mulberry Street, former Public School – long-standing cultural and emotional
those dimensions, including notable
23, was designed and constructed by the connection with the community not
opportunities, concerns, perceived architect Charles B. J. Snyder in 1891. just because of the services provided
trade-offs, areas of alignment, and Snyder was Superintendent of School by the nonprofit tenants but also
other concerns that the community Buildings for the New York City Board of because it had served the community
holds about the design of the building Education between 1891 and 1923. PS for decades as a public school.
and rebuilding process. 23 was Snyder’s first school building
design among many other eclectic school In January 2020, a five-alarm fire
Overall, participants prioritized buildings that are designated as New York destroyed most of the brick walls
preserving the building legacy and City landmarks such as the Erasmus Hall and corner tower, but the community
heritage and desired an expedited High School and Morris High School. The expressed a desire to explore
Preservation Assessment to determine last class of PS 23 graduated in 1976, preservation options for the remaining
after which the building was converted structure. Given the desire of the
which building elements to restore.
into a community center. 70 Mulberry community to continue the legacy and
A majority of the participants wanted Street, though not classified as a New heritage of 70 Mulberry Street, the
to speed up rebuilding time and York City landmark, is currently one of following building design dimensions
were concerned about the potential Chinatown’s notable historical buildings were listed for consideration under the
negative impacts of a 20-story building and is listed as a contributing building to community visioning process:
on the neighborhood. There was a firm the Chinatown National Register Historic – preservation versus demolition of
agreement on the need for modern District. The building owes its historical the remaining building structure and
interiors while restoring the building’s and architectural significance to multiple architectural elements;
factors, including its16: – adaptive reuse versus new interior
shell, specifically the stone facade and
– prominent location in the historic space planning of the building;
some architectural elements such core of Chinatown; – retaining current building height and
as the stairwell. Some participants – important history as renowned floor area versus extending building
urged the design process to inbuild school architect Charles B. J. height and floor area; and,
adaptation and flexibility for future Snyder’s first public school design; – retaining current programming
technologies. – unique fortress-like Romanesque versus extending current19 3X3 DESIGN US LLC
PS 23 building and classroom
Source: NYC Department of Records and Information Services
programming. the building’s rich immigrant history, in Renaissance Revival style. 65.8% of
long-standing historical connection, the survey respondents agreed for 70
II. Preservation versus full demolition and architectural legacy and difficult to Mulberry Street building elements to
replicate details. be preserved to a great extent, most
After the fire destroyed the top three importantly the structural safe parts of the
floors of the five-story building in January Architectural legacy: Charles B. J. Snyder building that might be identified through
2020, the City cleared the roof and introduced an innovative aspect in the a preservation assessment (derived from
flooring sections deemed unsafe and design of PS 23 through the inclusion figure 11).
in danger of collapsing. Tenants were of an auditorium that established the
allowed access to artifacts and personal school’s capacity for hosting community “If it is a hot summer day, you come
belongings.17 As the City weighed next events and public lectures. This into the stair, and it is kind of a cool
steps, some community advocates community-oriented feature became a stone. The building produces an
pressed for a preservation assessment hallmark of Snyder’s school designs. experience that you connect to going
for the building, while other groups in Another feat was the remarkable fusion there. And you go up through the stairs,
Chinatown advocated for full demolition of Norman Romanesque Revival with the and then you see different people who
and construction of a taller building. As Renaissance Revival architectural styles are coming and going from different
a result, the City facilitated the creation that is reflected in the brownstone base programs that you may or may not be
of an advisory committee of community paired with arched doorways and carved kind of associated or familiar with.”
leaders to undertake a community medieval motifs, the corner tower, and the
visioning process. brick façade.18 “It is the physical aspect of the building,
the beautiful brownstone, arches to the
Aspirations and Priorities Many participants remarked on the unique entrance, the pattern of the windows,
During the community meetings and architectural features of the building, the beautiful color of the brick corner
town hall, polarities continued to surface including the stairwell, columns, and door tower that towers over Columbus Park
on the topic of preservation—between knobs. Others noted the complex nature and was this community’s version of
preserving part of the building, including of the building rooted in Italian design a new Italian Campanella. It is the
its foundation and brownstone ashlar heritage but experienced by Chinese quality of the masonry. It is the physical
base, and full demolition. Several American students in its later years. presence in the heart of Chinatown.
practical, tangible, and intangible benefits Those with expertise in preservation and It is the long connection to the
of preserving the building elements of architecture remarked at the difficulty community, and is the crucial services
70 Mulberry Street were mentioned and expense of replicating the building’s provided by the tenants in that building
during the meetings spanning from masonry work and architectural details for tenants who deserve to be backYou can also read
